[ppml] Revocation

Ron da Silva ron at aol.net
Wed Feb 19 09:58:33 EST 2003

On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:29:42PM +0700, Dr. Jeffrey Race wrote:
> Yes I do a lookup on the upload and return paths (see
> http://www.camblab.com/nugget/extermin.htm for my MO).

Interesting redirect in your document to Va Code § 18.2-152.1-15...
(I think your annotation reference is incorrect though).
In particular, http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-152.12
regarding SPAM which seems to exempt the transiting relay or ISP.
Anyhow, I read through your methodology and see how you
identify an ip address associated with the SPAM (last relay
before delivery to recipient).

That address may be the originator, a friendly supporter of
the originator, a compromised host, an open relay (intentional
or unintentional), etc.  The next step is the difficult part.

We can correlate that address with some allocation or assignment
by an RIR.  What next?

> Here's where I need your help.   I don't want to make the proposal
> too specific.  But I want it clear that there is a chain of custody
> of delegated resources and they come with conditions.

Unfortunately, policy needs to be specific in order to be effective.
I think the best thing to do would be for you to consider under
what conditions do you propose ARIN take action and what actions
should be taken.  You (and anyone else that would like to help
you with this proposal) need to be as specific as possible.

> As noted in previous post, the RIRs only would become involved in
> cases of prolonged egregious negligence or tortious conduct.

Great step in getting more specific.  Need to define "prolonged
egregious negligence" though and then the associated proposed
actions by ARIN.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list